The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding) is that the issue of this case is "whether the defendant is guilty of aiding and abetting the crime of Bophishing fraud," and the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant, even though the defendant's defense that he believed only with C's request is not persuasive, the witness C's testimony is not reliable, and the witness's testimony is not reliable, and according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant, even if the defendant is guilty of aiding and abetting

2. Judgment on a mistake of fact

A. In light of the difference between the original court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness in light of the contents of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment, or there are exceptional circumstances where it is obviously unreasonable to maintain the lower court’s judgment as to the credibility of a statement made by the witness in the original judgment in full view of the results of examination and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment, or the results of additional examination by the time of closing argument in the appellate trial, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the lower court’s judgment solely on the ground that the lower court’s judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the original judgment is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012).

However, the court below consistently asserted that the defendant had consistently known the account number of the defendant upon the request of Dong Jae C, withdrawn and delivered the deposited money, or prevented transfer to another account, and that the legal statement of the witness C of the court below is consistent with the defendant's defense, and that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone facilitate the defendant's fraud.